Saddam had his shit straight

[brekk]

Me and the other IT guys at my lunch table got talking about Iraq, and came to the following conclusion.

Iraq was better off with saddam.

Yes, he was a dictator. Yes, he was extremely cruel, and ruthless. But it worked. He didn't put up with the shit of any of the fanatics, didn't matter which sect, they'd get fucked up. Did he go over the top with the kurds? definately, but overall he kept the country pretty stable.

You didn't have insurgents with Saddam, because he didn't have to be PC, and try to go the ethical route. He showed what hewas willing to do with the Kurds, and no-one else was willing to mess with him. Our military force overthere however is shackled, by the media, and forced to do a half-ass job, instead of just taking the problems out.

Collateral damage by the US military is now unacceptable to the world, and its hindering us.


It sucks, but when you're dealing with a nation with so many different groups within that have a deep hatred for eachother going back 100's of years, and driven by a religious furvor, democracy is not going to work.

[Zuuljin]

I agree. We're going to lose this war for the same reason the British lost its war with us. We're sticking to the "rules" of war, when the other side isnt. And whats the punishment for breaking the rules of war? Oh, nothing. I stand by nuking the whole area. Everyone knows its the best plan, but are too PC to admit it. The whole area is a shithole. Either start over, or let it be. We need to stop trying to save the world.

[Quineloe]

So the only solution is giving Saddam a few thousand soldiers and letting him take over Iraq again.

[frott]

Fucking delusional. We're in the business of delivering democracy and capitalism, destroying anything in the way. FYI the nation of islam is in the way of Our Leaders' vision of D&C.

Iraq was better off with Saddam because we are royally fistfucking the country, bleeding it of what capitalist gains we can scrape up and installing the new colonial imperialism.

We're not losing any war, the power-players of the country are profitting, that's ALL the war was about from beginning to end.

Noone was trying to save anything in Iraq. If you think we fight wars every time the poor and weak are persecuted you need to thumb to the appendix of your book of wars and see what monetary gain the protagonists had in the matter.

Sorry but most all of the soldiers that I know who are there now are rent-a-cops with career carrots dangled in front of them. A few of them feel duped, others know exactly what they were getting into.

Salute to the warmongers, I fully support the war machine and don't pull emo "war is bad" bullshit when I see the visceral evidence of it.

I'm also down with tearing all this capitalism shit away, but you cannot possibly tell me that things are fair when property owning has to be the grand cosmic scam that will be looked back on in 1,000 years as some sort of ridiculous farce perpetuated by the sad, sad proletariat.

Remember, the people who don't fight wars and steal shit, by virtue of being a martyr, will inherit the earth. So just sit back, relax, and surround yourself with the comforts of a system that you can't possibly begin to proselytise democracy into while continuing your denouncement of a people. It has been force-fed since the beginning of man, it doesn't work any other way.

[Clericnon2boxed]

I'd say iran plays a major role in destabilizing iraq (and the arab middleage mentality), I hope the US gets serious with them too, I know it wont happen due to oil reasons probably.

[Cedil]

frott: awesome post.

[Soriak]

Originally Posted by Zuuljin

I agree. We're going to lose this war for the same reason the British lost its war with us. We're sticking to the "rules" of war, when the other side isnt.

Yes, that's why the British lost the war - not at all because European powers joined in on it, or because they had to transport troops half way around the world. If they had only tortured people... by the way: international law (and especially human rights) didn't take off until after the french revolution.

And whats the punishment for breaking the rules of war? Oh, nothing.

For once, it's bad for business. Foreign investors will reconsider investing money in the US and god knows the US is dependant on foreign investments and foreigners covering US debts. You realize the US has a massive trade deficit, right? Every month you import more than you export, meaning you lose money. I'm sure you know that Asia (and largely China) are the ones picking up the tab and if they star dumping their bonds, the dollar's history is over. After WW2 germans used smokes as currency because the 'real' money became worthless pretty much the second people got it.

I stand by nuking the whole area. Everyone knows its the best plan, but are too PC to admit it. The whole area is a shithole. Either start over, or let it be. We need to stop trying to save the world.

I'll agree with your last sentence - stop trying to save the world. It's really not working out very well these days...

I know nukes look cool in movies, but we really don't need to discuss long term impact or any sort of international relations after the use of a nuclear weapon. Think about it on your own, it's definalty not pressing a button and solving all problems.

Besides, I don't think the government even wants to solve the problem of terrorism... it gives them a carde blanche to do whatever they want on surveillance or constitutional violations. Either you stand behind them, or you support activist judges/terrorists - or you're just a pussy who wants to cut and run. (how often have you heard that phrase on TV?)

Heck I wouldn't give up that kind of high ground for anything - forget domestic problems, just call the other side weak in the fight against terrorism and instant win. Hopefully this will change this fall, but I doubt it.


As for the original post: The nazis had their 'shit straight' too, violence against germans didn't happen much and the youth activities were exceptional. Of course the "kill the Jews" message kinda ruined that.

Guess what, there's still anti-semitism in Europe and integration is still a problem. But we're not gassing anyone anymore, so it's a decent step up.

You can't expect Iraq to recover from such a massive change in a day. Remember germany's situation after WW2? These things take time, look at Iraq again in 20-30 years. The whole idea that this thing would be over in a matter of weeks, or a couple years, was ridiculous to begin with. If you're not willing to commit to it long term, don't go in in the first place - simple as that.

[Cedil]

Except for the part where you said you don't think that war is bad.

I sincerely doubt you have ever

seen the visceral evidence of it

.

I'm willing to bet you'd think war was a pretty bad thing, having been through one.

[Lost Ranger]

I dont think it was ever about saving Iraq either... I doubt anyone really cares that much what happens to iraq or its people. Taking down a dictator was just a bonus from the real goal which is as you said earlier the "power players" agenda.

The only government I personally think needs taken down for the sake of "saving people" is Iran. That guy isnt all there heh.

[Clericnon2boxed]

umm please stop the comparisions with germany after ww2

Originally Posted by Soriak

I'll agree with your last sentence - stop trying to save the world. It's really not working out very well these days

uh yeah let them all have nukes and go crazy (there will always be reasons to hate the "western culture" and there is the gaping wound called israel), the ICBMs and the fallout wont ever reach us

Originally Posted by Lost Ranger

The only government I personally think needs taken down for the sake of "saving people" is Iran. That guy isnt all there heh.

Forgot North Korea? They need it badly since decades.

[Kiely]

Has Saddam been proven guilty yet of anything? haven't been keeping up to date with him. n charges etc.
You won't see Blair in a couple of years because of this Iraq business either.

[Dokomo]

I'm tired of Bush and Rummy calling the Terrorists Islamo-Fascists. Have they looked up the definition of Fascism? The terrorists are not pushing for a dictatorship or talking about nationalizing Arab Industry or Commerce. Sure, they plan on an oppressive government, but you need more to be a fascist.

[Soriak]

Originally Posted by Clericnon2boxed

umm please stop the comparisions with germany after ww2

It's such a good example... country with an oppressed minority freed by US intervention and forced to change their opinion of one another. Anti-semitism is still present in Germany, right wing parties get a lot of votes by using similiar paroles (though not as violent or openly anti-semitic or racist) - and that's a country that isn't doing all that bad economicly, has a stable government, no insurgency. You can't expect people in Iraq to happily live together so shortly after an intervention.

You know just as well that Bush is going to keep up the "we'll bring them back as soon as possible" speech until he's out of office... those things don't take a few years, they take decades.

uh yeah let them all have nukes and go crazy (there will always be reasons to hate the "western culture" and there is the gaping wound called israel), the ICBMs and the fallout wont ever reach us

Despite what some people claim, it's not all that easy to get the stuff to make a real atomic bomb. The theory behind it is child's play, every high school student can (or should be able to) explain how it works. Now getting the plutonium or uranium is a different topic, and so is building a rocket capable of delivering it at great range.

When you're talking about terrorists, neither plutonium nor a good rocket system are required though. Just get something radioactive (something that makes a geiger counter go off - maximum panic), add it to a home-made bomb, walk around in a major city and blow yourself up. It's pretty simple if you don't care about surviving.

Forgot North Korea? They need it badly since decades.

There're more countries with leaders who give agressive speeches, and even more with political instability. If you want a list of countries that don't treat their people fairly, it'd be a much shorter list if you instead listed those who do.

There's a saying: All politics are local.
Makes a lot more sense to believe Ahmedinejad wants to look tough for his own people, than that he really wants to go after Israel and the US.

[Taranatar]

So if Saddam was so awesome and worthy of praise for mass murdering, why not do the same to Hitler, or even Bush to a lesser degree?

Not that I like any of those fuckers.

[Quineloe]

Hitler didnt have his shit straight. Way too many attempted assassinations.